1.000 years old Inca artifact proven to be a replica of an ancient aircraft.

[X10iUser]

Ancients worked with what they had and largely, what they had was absolutely no scientific knowledge about the world and how it really worked.

Does make you wonder how they knew so much about the solar system doesn't it. Pluto discovered by modern day man in 1930 with technology, ancients discovered it thousands of years ago, apparently with no technology. Late 1800's early 1900's aircraft started to be developed, thousands of years ago they were depicting similar craft.

Just guessing and superstition; gods of all kinds abound and to say they had help from ancient astronauts is absurd and silly and goofy.

Not really, depends how open minded you're I guess.

As you said, it could be figures of women.

"could be" being the operative term.

 

[byteware]

This thing is a thousand years old and aerodynamically correct.

Prove it. And don't point to the video. You have no idea if what they built was even to scale. You believe because they tell you.

If it isn't verified by a reputable source, it aint true.

Looks like one of the 3 we see to me.

Well, I guess that's enough scientific proof for us... oh wait. no.

 

[X10iUser]

You believe because they tell you.

But you want me to believe you because you say it isn't. You have your opinion and I have mine.

 

[byteware]

But you want me to believe you because you say it isn't. You have your opinion and I have mine.

I don't want you to believe me. That would be absolutely asinine. I have my views on things for my reasons.

What I DO want, is for you to NOT believe something unless you have proof.

What I DO want, is for you to NOT believe something simply because someone says so. Especially if it's not coming from a reliable source.

 

[X10iUser]

What I DO want, is for you to NOT believe something unless you have proof.

My opinion is based on the information I have seen.

What I DO want, is for you to NOT believe something simply because someone says so. Especially if it's not coming from a reliable source.

It's a 1000 year old artefact, so thoughts and opinions on what it is are open to interpretation as no one today can categorically state what it is or it isn't, but like I said, my opinion is based on what I've seen.

What does that look like to you? There is so much evidence to suggest the ancients were far more technologically advanced than has been stated by "reliable sources", so for me, it's not too much of a stretch of the imagination to assume that they used what we call planes to fly, even less so when I see artefacts like the above.

 

[X10iUser]

To the next generation of Egyptologists, the birdlike artifact looked uncannily like an airplane. The resemblance was so striking that a team of aviation experts was assembled in the early Seventies to explore this hypothesis.

Their study revealed that the 5.6-inch long body was aerodynamically sound. In fact, one aeronautics engineer noted a remarkable similarity between the Saqqara bird and a new, oblique-winged aircraft that NASA planned to build. And when the tiny wooden relic was subjected to the ultimate test -- a flight trial -- it soared through the air with the ease and grace of a modern-day glider.To the experts, the conclusion was inescapable: The 2,000-year-old object was a model airplane."....

There are several types of animals which fly; birds, insects, and several mammals, such as bats and some gliders, for instance flying squirrels, oppossums, and then there are some lizards; there are also some fish which for brief periods glide through the air.

There are water animals which seem to fly through the water, such as rays, skates and some selachians. But how does the depicted object compare with these choices? All its features taken into a consideration, we have no match. Seen from above, the object obviously has no fish features, but seems to show rather explicitly mechanistic ones.

In 1997, two Germans, Algund Eenboom and Peter Belting, put the theory to the test.

Eenboom centered his research on historical evidence and concluded the "wings" of all insects are attached at the top of the corpus, not at the bottom, and that all Incan artifacts except these few suspected "planes" were made correctly.

Belting made a model plane, first with a propeller, afterwards with a jet engine. Whereas the first has to be launched by hand, the jet engine one was also equipped with landing gear.

At the recent Ancient Astronaut Society World Conference in Orlando, Florida, the two researchers showed extensive footage of their model planes.

The propeller-powered plane flew perfectly stable. But the crowd almost gave a standing ovation for the jet-engine model plane. With an impeccable take-off, flight and landing -- and an exact match to the model found in the Inca grave -- the model is truly an airplane.

Eenboom and Belting gave a live demonstration in a parking lot of the Florida Mall in Orlando, in case anyone would still doubt it after the videos.

- SOURCE

 

[byteware]

My opinion is based on the information I have seen.

It's a 1000 year old artefact, so thoughts and opinions on what it is are open to interpretation as no one today can categorically state what it is or it isn't, but like I said, my opinion is based on what I've seen.

Who says that's a thousand year old artifact?

What does that look like to you?

IT looks to me, like someone trying to make an airplane like artifact today and pass it off as an "artifact".

 

[byteware]

- SOURCE

And what are the credentials of s8int.com?

None that I can find. This information isn't found at any reliable source that I can find.

I mean, you can believe it, if you want to, but it has as much chance of being true as the guy at the qwikimart telling you about his abduction.

 

[dan330]

And what are the credentials of s8int.com?

None that I can find. This information isn't found at any reliable source that I can find.

I mean, you can believe it, if you want to, but it has as much chance of being true as the guy at the qwikimart telling you about his abduction.

I agree with you....

info is only as good as it's source. info on tv or internet is suspect till it is attached to someone or entity that has credit.

that said.. it is fun and interesting to read and watch.

hear is another thought...my theory...
in the pyramids with the king.. they place slaves and valuables and food to help the king to his new world after death.
looking at it... it could be food. a fish that was split in half and laid out to dry. They made it out of gold which combines food and valuable material.

 

[X10iUser]

And what are the credentials of s8int.com?

Are Algund Eenboom and Peter Belting not real people, did they not demonstrate their model?

This information isn't found at any reliable source that I can find.

Where would you suggest I look for "credible" information relating to ancient technology?

 

[X10iUser]

IT looks to me, like someone trying to make an airplane like artifact today and pass it off as an "artifact".

And you base that on what information? I'm assuming you've done a bit of research and ended up at that conclusion, so please share.

 

[byteware]

Are Algund Eenboom and Peter Belting not real people, did they not demonstrate their model?

Oh, they demonstrated their model. They demonstrated that fine. They didn't prove that it was an exact to scale replica of an ancient artifact though. If I build a model, and tell you that's what it is, and make it fly... will you believe THAT as well?

Where would you suggest I look for "credible" information relating to ancient technology?

I would start in academia. Especially since, a great deal of their technology is accepted history.

 

[byteware]

And you base that on what information? I'm assuming you've done a bit of research and ended up at that conclusion, so please share.

Maybe you don't understand how the process works. They have to prove what they are claiming is true. Otherwise, it's just baseless claims.




At this point, however, it has become clear to me that you aren't interested in the truth, but only what you want to hear. You can't have a reasonable discussion with someone who seeks out what he wants to hear, instead of seeking out what is true... So, I'm out of the discussion.

 

[Hrethgir]

biologist-zoologist Ivan T. Sanderson did new analysis in such objects and concluded that they were models of a high-speed aircraft with, at least, a thousand years old.

This guy also wrote books like "Invisible Residents: The Reality of Underwater UFOs", "Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life: The Story Of Sub-Humans On Five Continents From The Early Ice Age Until Today" and "Vimana Aircraft of Ancient India and Atlantis." Those titles don't exactly fill me with confidence that he's legit and not some whackjob. Especially the book about aircraft of Atlatis. Atlantis hasn't even been discoved, but somehow he knows about their aircraft! Anyways, take everything you read at AboveTopSecret.com with a grain of salt, it's packed with conspiricy theorists who are positive we never landed people on the moon and that the Earth is being secretly run by a consortium of 9 different aliens.

Also, that Ivan guy died in early 1973, so this isn't exactly new info. Someone just built a model that flew. And like has been said already, I've seen models that looked like speedboats and lawnmowers that can fly too. Does that mean Honda built their lawnmower off an alien shuttlecraft too? Just because something flys doesn't mean it was modeled on an airplane.

http://flyingthingz.com/

 

[Tangent]

Even after watching the video do you not find it strange that when upscaled it's aerodynamically correct and can indeed fly?

Let me direct you to this video to prove just how "aerodynamically correct" something needs to be to fly...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26PpA1kFIWw

 

[X10iUser]

They didn't prove that it was an exact to scale replica of an ancient artifact though.

That's your opinion, and my point in asking was to show the site you claim isn't credible reported a real event regardless of your thoughts on the content but using your logic it was actors and a staged event.

If I build a model, and tell you that's what it is, and make it fly... will you believe THAT as well?

If you show what it is you've replicated then why wouldn't I.

They have to prove what they are claiming is true. Otherwise, it's just baseless claims.

They've documented it haven't they.

At this point, however, it has become clear to me that you aren't interested in the truth, but only what you want to hear.

It's interesting, and I'm happy to discuss it, although you've made it quite tiring with your "who said it is" type responses that have done nothing to refute what's been claimed.

You can't have a reasonable discussion with someone who seeks out what he wants to hear

That works both ways, the difference however is that I've posted information to support what's being claimed, and it's clear from your first post you weren't really interested in discussing it, so I'll agree to disagree on this occasion. With subjects like this you're not going to find all the evidence and "proof" so to speak at "credible" sources, because for mainstream science to acknowledge and give as much focus to "out of place" findings is one step closer to acknowledging all religion is BS and the ramifications of that the religious Worldand Governments just aren't going to allow.

Yes there is a lot of crap on the net, but there is also a lot of valid information too, take Nikola Tesla for example, the bulk of information about him is found on alternative media type sites, despite him being one of the greatest minds this planet has ever seen in the last 150 years, but that doesn't make him or his work any less credible.

For those that are still interested, never mind flying machines a 1000 years ago, what about 4000 years ago, "Vymanika Shastra" anyone?

This video speaks for itself (ignore the title and watch)...

 

[copestag]

What does that look like to you?

judging from the obvious eyes, nose, mouth, and arms drawn....... it looks to me like a monkey in an elvis cape...........

oh my...... what they have really discovered is that ancient people could see into the future and knew that elvis wore a cape and that monkeys would someday wear them

 

[momoceio]

What was the video supposed to prove? Did it have a point?

 

[iDR0ID]

everyone drinks kool-aid, which flavor you choose is up to you. Some believe in God, some believe in ET.... until Skyline or V aliens show up over cities.... I'll keep drinking the koolaid I like, no reason to change.

 

[X10iUser]

What was the video supposed to prove? Did it have a point?

What it demonstrates is how the ancients may have perceived what they saw and how they reacted to seeing flying vehicles, and might explain why there are so many references to flying machines in the form of artefacts art and scripture throughout ancient history.

Let's look at technology for a minute. I've mentioned Nikola Tesla, who should be a household name imo because with out his work I seriously doubt we would be where we are today in regards to technological advancement, but he died penniless and pretty much forgotten about despite the fact he was thee greatest inventor of his time and quite famous for his demonstrations. If Tesla's greatest work had been realised, today there is no telling where mankind would be and we'd have stopped using fossil fuels at least 80 years ago.

If Tesla was able to harness and use such technology, is it so hard to believe that the ancients did too given that advanced are we as today can't replicate some of their achievements? I've been skeptical believe me, but it was after reading a book called Gods Of The New Millennium about 10 years ago that changed my whole outlook on whether aliens had actually visited Earth and built the pyramids or was it really man that built them, but using advanced technology, because we must have been far more advanced in ancient times than what we've been led to believe, because the context just doesn't fit the evidence.

Look at Edward Leedskalnin's "Coral Castle" and the secrecy he went to to conceal it, was he using similar energy to what Tesla demonstrated? Could he have wanted to protect his discovery for fear of going through a similar fate to Tesla?

Look at the "Hutchinson Effect" (see vid), had Tesla and Leedskalnin already discovered and perfected it, and is it just possible that the Sumerians 6000 years ago were the first to discover, harness and use such technology, because if they were, then what else were they capable of?

That's quite a leap to make considering how stylized their animal art was...

That's one way of looking at it, but when you look at other artefacts from around the same time depicting animals you can tell what they are because of the realistic detail and they don't stray far in artistic terms.

 

[Tangent]

...
That's one way of looking at it, but when you look at other artefacts from around the same time depicting animals you can tell what they are because of the realistic detail and they don't stray far in artistic terms.

That doesn't mean a thing. Most artists from the early 1900's painted in a realistic manner. Does that mean that Picasso was aware of an extra dimension that made people look all blocky and distorted?

If we are to make the leap that all ancient cultural art depicted things realistically we would have to accept that the Egyptians knew how to successfully graft animal heads onto human bodies. Also, fire-breathing dragons plagued the Chinese and Europeans, and the Greeks could look into the sky to see lions with the head and wings of an eagle flying around.

EDIT: Also, their Jaguars looked more like wiener dogs with huge mouths:

And their snakes were pretty short but with gigantic head to body size ratios:

 

[byteware]

That's your opinion

It is not my opinion that proving something requires more than saying that it's true.

To prove that the supposed artifact is actually a 1,000 year old artifact they could simply let us know which museum, or academic institution currently houses the artifact, or that verified the artifacts age.

To prove that the plane was a scale replication, they could post a link to the academic institutions measurements of the artifact, so that it could be recreated by anyone. They didn't do that either.

They provided no actual evidence that any of their claims were true (other than what they built flew) other than they said it was true.

That's not my opinion.

That's the actual state of things.

It's not on me to prove it wrong. It's on THEM to prove that they are telling the truth.

When they prove that they are telling the truth, then I will believe them.

 

[X10iUser]

EDIT: Also, their Jaguars looked more like wiener dogs with huge mouths:

The point was that thinks like that and the snake, you can tell what they are, which is depictions of animals.

 

[Anthony1]

If that's an ancient aircraft then they weren't very good aircraft designers....bloody awful in fact.

The triangular delta wing design is very inefficient. It was in vogue during the 1960's when aircraft were first pushing mach 2 but was soon abandoned when it's obvious shortcomings became apparent. The only thing they're good for is going supersonic in a straight line, yet there are plenty of details on that model that obviously preclude that ability.

It's a bit odd that it has a tail plane too, you don't need one with a triangle delta and if you did decide to have one, like in the Mig 21, it certainly wouldn't be straight and so close to the main wing like the above. In fact they'd be totally useless in that position anyway if you were going at very high speed, and if you aren't going at very high speed you don't want to use a triangle delta. In short it's a terrible design.

Of course you could argue that it's just a representation and not a true model, but then that argument works both ways, it could be just about anything in that case. My money is on the monkey in the cape theory.

 

[Tangent]

The point was that thinks like that and the snake, you can tell what they are, which is depictions of animals.

The other one looks like a depiction of an animal too. It's a monkey. The "cape" is it's arms. That detail would be too difficult and too fragile to produce more realistically so they used a cape-shaped background on which they engraved the shape of the arms. The same thing applies to the monkey's tail, which is represented as hanging down past it's feet and curling forward, forming the shape that some see as an aircraft vertical stabilizer.